Who molested/abused Jonbenet?

[Anti-K]

Edited my statement:

First of all, unless we assume that the killer performed the acute molestation, we cannot know who molested JB prior to December 26, even when we discover who killed her, but we can look at what JonBenet's body tells us that may be related.



There is information about the knots all over this forum. If you have evidence that refutes JR being near the wrist knots, post it. TIA IIRC, JR claims two attempts to loosen the wrist knots in an effort to remove them from binding his daughter. He stops himself the first time in the WC concrete room. This could be false. Maybe he piddled with the tape while FW was trying to catch up to him. But he does not offer this information about "untying" in the WC until in mid '97.

JR begins to untie the wrist knots while JBRs body is laying under or near the Christmas tree upstairs. LA ordered him to back away from the cords. I agree the wrist bindings were on both wrists as she was carried upstairs. JR loosened the L wrist cord and the R cord remain fairly tight around her wrist on top of her sleeves.





The Smit depo does state that. Have you googled blue fibers JonBenet right shoulder? My notes have: dark blue fibers match duvet/sham in vaginal area and shirt back of right shoulder.

Steve Thomas Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia) 09/21/01
25 Q. But the FBI disagreed with the
247
1 CBI, didn't they?
2 A. On what point?
3 Q. On the question of whether there
4 were fibers inside materials found in the
5 suitcase found under the window in the
6 basement consistent with fibers found on
7 JonBenet?
8 A. No, I'm aware of Smit and DeMuth's
9 position or stating this consistency of these
10 fibers, but I'm not aware of a disagreement
11 between the FBI and that finding.




Have you googled tests positive for creatinine from the stain on JonBenet basement carpet?



Anti-K, please clarify. Are you referring to the twin sets of "stun gun" marks on her legs in the summer photograph or the mention in the AR of small abrasions on the lower back of her L leg appx 4" above the ankle? Also, there's an upper L horizontal shoulder abrasion.

Your edited statement makes even less sense to me, now. So, let‘s just let that one go. The misunderstanding is probably my fault. Sorry.
.

I’m also still confused about what you’re trying to say about Mr Ramsey and the knots. Originally, I thought you were saying that Mr Ramsey’s story changed from not touching the knots to fumbling with them. Or, something. Where did the story change? Or, what?
.

The only reference to fibers being on the right shoulder that I know of is in the Bonita Papers. I don’t think it should be a surprise to any case old-timers that the Bonita Papers are not universally considered to be a reliable source. I know there are still some RDI around who are fond of them, but... I’ll pass.
.

The Thomas deposition is full of just how little Thomas was really aware of.
.

Yes, I did google “creatinine from the stain on JonBenet basement carpet.” Did you?
.

As far as I know it is only forum posters who consider there to be more than two possible stun gun marks: one on the face, one on the back.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

I am not attempting to prove premed with a prefabricated garrote. However, the cord could have been prepared the day or two in advance of the crime.



The killer fixed her hair style out of the way as much as possible with the additional hair ties. The long blonde hair became entwined in the cord when the broken paintbrush was twisted close to and became tangled in her long hair. At autopsy, her hair was cut away from the cord where it was entangled at the broken paintbrush.



I concur that is a highly likely scenario.

So where is the missing tip end of the broken paintbrush? It is missing, you agree?

If the sexual rape or digital assault and wiping takes place in her bed, then, in the basement,

Consider this:
The prepared ligature could be tightened from standing behind but the knot could have ended up in the back due to manipulation of the ends. The broken brush could be added at this point in time. Broken stick was twisted to strangle and entangled the long blonde hair.

What if the victim is standing, restrained or controlled, from the initial partial strangulation, and is whacked over the head? She collapses. Her bladder releases one last time. The ligature slides or rolls up the neck to its final circumferential positioning. She is laying in the same spot you previously described.

:seeya:

No. You have much of this wrong.

The hair entwined in the ligature knot (around the neck) was cut by the coroner, not the hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle. The hair entwined in the hair wrapped around the handle was pulled out of the victim’s head when the handle was pulled by her killer. See Kolar; start listening at 94:30 mark, here: http://tinyurl.com/kptc2co

The handle was pulled, not twisted. There is no twisting involved. The killer re-arranging the victim’s hair is mere forum conjecture.

The sexual assault occurred at or near point of death. The urine did not wash away the blood, so the penetration probably occurred after the bladder released.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Midwest Mama you have covered lots of details in your post. I am glad you posted your theory.
I can tell you thought through the whole thing.
I think we all have these theories in what happened and yours is as good as any one has given.
I have a problem with mine. It keeps changing.

I know this has been discussed, and just recently. Who is responsible or are all for killing JBR. (If you are an RDI) The one who hit her on the head if that was first because she would have eventually died from that. Or, the one, if a different person who strangled her? No matter what order you think they came in. Was it the first person who did something to JB that would have led to her death, the final person, or all.
This still confuses me. So I really don't know if I am a BDI, PDI, JDI or just a RDI.
Just wondering.

JuneBug, you were posting as I was posting. I am sorry to hear about what happened to you. I agree it can and does happen.

This needn’t be an RDI question.

If one person was responsible for the head blow and a second person was responsible for the asphyxiation than, IMO, both persons would be responsible for the killing.
...

AK

 

[DeDee]

Respectfully moved your post to new quote w/my replies in red.
...
AK

Your edited statement makes even less sense to me, now. So, let‘s just let that one go. The misunderstanding is probably my fault. Sorry.
. I already forgive you for that.

I’m also still confused about what you’re trying to say about Mr Ramsey and the knots. Originally, I thought you were saying that Mr Ramsey’s story changed from not touching the knots to fumbling with them. Or, something. Where did the story change? Or, what?
. JR misspoke on occasion. Are the knots significant to Mr. Ramsey and the molestation?

The only reference to fibers being on the right shoulder that I know of is in the Bonita Papers. I don’t think it should be a surprise to any case old-timers that the Bonita Papers are not universally considered to be a reliable source. I know there are still some RDI around who are fond of them, but... I’ll pass.
. Each of us takes away something usually, even little funny clues.

The Thomas deposition is full of just how little Thomas was really aware of.
. I couldn't agree more. It was as if the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. For instance, in deposition, when asked more details about the stun gun theory, ST had to admit that was Trujillo's assignment. Also, when asked about hair and fibers, ST again deferred to not being aware since those areas were assigned to Trujillo except for the red fibers matching PRs jacket and declared PRs involvement.
Those ST statements, taken under oath, can be located around the 367 -374 and 385 sections of STs depo.

Yes, I did google “creatinine from the stain on JonBenet basement carpet.” Did you?
.No.

As far as I know it is only forum posters who consider there to be more than two possible stun gun marks: one on the face, one on the back.
... I am not one who believes there to be three sets of twin "stun gun" marks on her body at TOD. I do agree the ones on her right cheek and lower back are from stun guns or similar. I have never seen photos of the back lower leg abrasions and the AR description of the two on the back of the leg is too vague to determine.

OMO

 

[Venom]

No. You have much of this wrong.

The hair entwined in the ligature knot (around the neck) was cut by the coroner, not the hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle. The hair entwined in the hair wrapped around the handle was pulled out of the victim’s head when the handle was pulled by her killer. See Kolar; start listening at 94:30 mark, here: http://tinyurl.com/kptc2co

The handle was pulled, not twisted. There is no twisting involved. The killer re-arranging the victim’s hair is mere forum conjecture.

The sexual assault occurred at or near point of death. The urine did not wash away the blood, so the penetration probably occurred after the bladder released.
...

AK

BBM- If it's fairly common for the bladder to relax at death, how could that play into things? I'm thinking it could be possible for the sexual assault to have happened after death.
Maybe I'm just thinking too much and should put this kindle down and finally go to sleep.

 

[Anti-K]

Your edited statement makes even less sense to me, now. So, let‘s just let that one go. The misunderstanding is probably my fault. Sorry.
. I already forgive you for that.

I’m also still confused about what you’re trying to say about Mr Ramsey and the knots. Originally, I thought you were saying that Mr Ramsey’s story changed from not touching the knots to fumbling with them. Or, something. Where did the story change? Or, what?
. JR misspoke on occasion. Are the knots significant to Mr. Ramsey and the molestation?

The only reference to fibers being on the right shoulder that I know of is in the Bonita Papers. I don’t think it should be a surprise to any case old-timers that the Bonita Papers are not universally considered to be a reliable source. I know there are still some RDI around who are fond of them, but... I’ll pass.
. Each of us takes away something usually, even little funny clues.

The Thomas deposition is full of just how little Thomas was really aware of.
. I couldn't agree more. It was as if the left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. For instance, in deposition, when asked more details about the stun gun theory, ST had to admit that was Trujillo's assignment. Also, when asked about hair and fibers, ST again deferred to not being aware since those areas were assigned to Trujillo except for the red fibers matching PRs jacket and declared PRs involvement.
Those ST statements, taken under oath, can be located around the 367 -374 and 385 sections of STs depo.

Yes, I did google “creatinine from the stain on JonBenet basement carpet.” Did you?
.No.

As far as I know it is only forum posters who consider there to be more than two possible stun gun marks: one on the face, one on the back.
... I am not one who believes there to be three sets of twin "stun gun" marks on her body at TOD. I do agree the ones on her right cheek and lower back are from stun guns or similar. I have never seen photos of the back lower leg abrasions and the AR description of the two on the back of the leg is too vague to determine.

OMO

I’ve often thought that Mr Ramsey was his own worst enemy, and I say this as one who thinks that he is as innocent of this crime as innocent can be.
.

Fibers: iirc, in the Smit depo it is stated that the fibers were on the outside of the front and back of the shirt. If this is the case, than I think some of those fibers would probably be on one of the shoulders and probably both (picturing victim laying on top of duvet or unknown object). If the fibers were on the front and the back of the shirt than it can be misleading to only say that they were on the right shoulder.

I take the fiber evidence into consideration, but I always keep in mind that the fiber evidence comes with some uncertainty. Anyone who believes that the DNA evidence is innocent transfer should know exactly what I mean. Because, secondary (and further) transfer of fibers is far more commonly and frequently and easily done. And, fibers are only ever consistent with.

Adding to that uncertainty, I think that in some cases fiber evidence has been misrepresented (shirt fibers in genital area), or exaggerated (entwined in ligatures) and contradictory (FBI vs CBI on the duvet). So, I consider the fiber evidence, but I make nothing concrete of it.

It’s okay and, I think worthwhile on some level, to speculate as if the fibers on the shirt did come from the duvet, but not to exclusion. Because of the conflicting reports one must also speculate as if the fibers did not come from the duvet.
.

At least we agree on Thomas.
.

Thanks for clarifying your position on the abrasions and possible stun gun use. I’m on the stun gun fence.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

BBM- If it's fairly common for the bladder to relax at death, how could that play into things? I'm thinking it could be possible for the sexual assault to have happened after death.
Maybe I'm just thinking too much and should put this kindle down and finally go to sleep.

I posted this on a different thread:
If we go with the stun gun theory and accept that being stunned could have caused her bladder to void, then we have
1) victim stunned; bladder empties
2) killer pulls down leggings and panties
3) killer molests victim
4) killer wipes victim
5) killer pulls up panties; blood drips onto panties either from victim, or from object used for penetration at step 3, or step 4, or step 5
...

AK

 

[midwest mama]

Midwest Mama you have covered lots of details in your post. I am glad you posted your theory.
I can tell you thought through the whole thing.
I think we all have these theories in what happened and yours is as good as any one has given.
I have a problem with mine. It keeps changing.

I know this has been discussed, and just recently. Who is responsible or are all for killing JBR. (If you are an RDI) The one who hit her on the head if that was first because she would have eventually died from that. Or, the one, if a different person who strangled her? No matter what order you think they came in. Was it the first person who did something to JB that would have led to her death, the final person, or all.
This still confuses me. So I really don't know if I am a BDI, PDI, JDI or just a RDI.
Just wondering.

JuneBug, you were posting as I was posting. I am sorry to hear about what happened to you. I agree it can and does happen.

I am definitely RDI. Based on what I have learned about the case over the years, I have to look at JR as the one to pull the ligature tight enough to finally strangle JB. And, IMO, it would be chargeable as First Degree Murder, since he took this action over making a decision to call for emergency services in an attempt to get help for JB.

I do not believe BR should be held accountable for a part he may have had in causing JB to become unconscious, for the same reasons CO does not hold children under the age of 10 chargeable for crimes. I do not think BR dealt the head bash or the final strangulation.

I have to be open to the fact that PR dealt the head blow, and was able to later "stage" a sexual attack, since I find it possible she wrote the RN. I believe she knew JB had been previously molested, and thought she would be able to camouflage the obvious evidence of that night's attack by creating a fresh penetration.

I go back and forth between what degree pf actual involvement each of the R's had, and it makes me crazy that this case is not even chargeable, much less prosecuteable according to the known evidence. :banghead:

 

[DeDee]

...

RSBM Quoted below with my response in red
...
AK

I’ve often thought that Mr Ramsey was his own worst enemy, and I say this as one who thinks that he is as innocent of this crime as innocent can be.
.This feeling toward JR is more correct than some realize. As a matter of fact, without his expressed permission, he quickly became deep in a quagmire of someone else's making.

Fibers: iirc, in the Smit depo it is stated that the fibers were on the outside of the front and back of the shirt. If this is the case, than I think some of those fibers would probably be on one of the shoulders and probably both (picturing victim laying on top of duvet or unknown object). If the fibers were on the front and the back of the shirt than it can be misleading to only say that they were on the right shoulder.

I take the fiber evidence into consideration, but I always keep in mind that the fiber evidence comes with some uncertainty. Anyone who believes that the DNA evidence is innocent transfer should know exactly what I mean. Because, secondary (and further) transfer of fibers is far more commonly and frequently and easily done. And, fibers are only ever consistent with.

The DNA belonging to one male found on two items belonging to JRB is alarming. A more careful study of the DNA is lacking on my research eval.

Adding to that uncertainty, I think that in some cases fiber evidence has been misrepresented (shirt fibers in genital area), or exaggerated (entwined in ligatures) and contradictory (FBI vs CBI on the duvet). So, I consider the fiber evidence, but I make nothing concrete of it.

Correct. That is a fair way of viewing the fiber evidence that we are aware of only there is more that we have not been made privy to. GJ secret testimony. And some of that leaked out.

It’s okay and, I think worthwhile on some level, to speculate as if the fibers on the shirt did come from the duvet, but not to exclusion. Because of the conflicting reports one must also speculate as if the fibers did not come from the duvet.
.The blue duvet/sham fibers are most significant when attempting to establish a timeline of events. Accepting the blue fibers are from the duvet, when did the victim come into contact with that duvet? Duvet fibers were also in the coroner's body bag. The book of nude drawings inside the Samsonite is also suspect. P&J both declined knowledge of anything being inside the blue Samsonite luggage yet it is highly likely that their daughter was in direct contact with items held inside that Samsonite on the night she met her monster.

At least we agree on Thomas.
.:drumroll:

Thanks for clarifying your position on the abrasions and possible stun gun use. I’m on the stun gun fence.

Kolar introduced the train track marks to support his theory of BR possibly being a harmful, abusive child. Admittedly, without the center pin, the other two pins accommodate the measurements of the injuries. Regardless, my own in depth study of the stun gun theory has left me concurring to its usage as a strong possibility.

OMO DeDee

 

[otg]

No. You have much of this wrong.

The hair entwined in the ligature knot (around the neck) was cut by the coroner, not the hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle. The hair entwined in the hair wrapped around the handle was pulled out of the victim’s head when the handle was pulled by her killer. See Kolar; start listening at 94:30 mark, here: http://tinyurl.com/kptc2co

The handle was pulled, not twisted. There is no twisting involved. The killer re-arranging the victim’s hair is mere forum conjecture.

In the webcast you referenced, I don't think Kolar ever understood the significance of whether or not the coroner had to cut any of the hair that was entwined with the cord wraps on the paintbrush (despite Cynic's valiant attempt to get it out of him). He even said during the questions that he had seen so many photos he wasn't really sure about the details. One of the photos taken of JonBenet's body on the floor appears to show at least two strands of hair pulled tight between the "handle" and her head. I'm still not convinced from what Kolar said that this wasn't the case, but we can disagree on that. Unfortunately, Meyer was not very specific about this in his AR either.

The sexual assault occurred at or near point of death. The urine did not wash away the blood, so the penetration probably occurred after the bladder released.

I agree that the urine may not have washed away the blood (although that is still a possible contributing factor). But the conclusion that this means the penetration occurred after the bladder release is incorrect. If anything, this assumption would indicate the opposite. The AR indicates that the penetration occurred while she was alive. The urine release would happen postmortem.

Also, if you listen to the question just after the discussion you referenced in your post, Kolar confirms (if you choose to rely on his recollection) the urine stain on the carpet in the basement, which in some other post you had said was never tested and confirmed. This urine stain was first brought up years ago by Jameson before the public was aware of it. There was speculation at one time (not that it matters now) to deflect its significance that it might have even been a spot made by Jacques because of his habit of peeing on the floor. It has since been confirmed by other inside sources that it was human urine. I don't know if it was tested for DNA. But don't bother asking me for links -- I don't have the time to research it. If anyone chooses to ignore this as legitimate evidence, it's their choice.

 

[otg]

(snipped)

snipped for brevity -
"I disagree completely with that one. I believe the strangulation is what was accidental."

OTG, I really appreciate your methodical posts which are supported by scientific research. I was most intriqued by your research on the golf club and head blow.
Thank you for all your excellent posts.

Your comment above makes me wonder how you think it happened.
I have read Kolar's book as well as Steve Thomas', yet I thought the strangulation was intentional as part of the staging after she was knocked out by the head blow.
You may have already posted your JBR theory, but I have not come across it.
If you would, please refer me to your theory if you have it posted and if not,
would you be so kind as to share your JBR Theory on how it happened with the order of events. Thank you.

:heartbeat: Thank you for all the kind words, Sandstorm. One of these days I should put it all together and post my theory in the Members' Theories thread (either that or write a book ), but I haven't done it yet.

A simple answer to the part of my post you questioned is that I think the cord was tied loosely around JonBenet's neck and secured to some other object (maybe a doorknob?) while the molestation was happening. I think the head blow was deliberate, but not premeditated. I think it caused her to collapse because of unconsciousness, thereby pulling on the cord which tightened around her neck strangling her.

If you care to read a little more detail, I probably wrote more in the following post than I have anywhere else:

Explain BDI to me - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


If you have any questions that aren't answered there, just ask, or drop me a PM.

 

[Tadpole12]

:heartbeat: Thank you for all the kind words, Sandstorm. One of these days I should put it all together and post my theory in the Members' Theories thread (either that or write a book ), but I haven't done it yet.

A simple answer to the part of my post you questioned is that I think the cord was tied loosely around JonBenet's neck and secured to some other object (maybe a doorknob?) while the molestation was happening. I think the head blow was deliberate, but not premeditated. I think it caused her to collapse because of unconsciousness, thereby pulling on the cord which tightened around her neck strangling her.

If you care to read a little more detail, I probably wrote more in the following post than I have anywhere else:

Explain BDI to me - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


If you have any questions that aren't answered there, just ask, or drop me a PM.

Heyya otg,

OT, but I can't help but note
deaths by asphyxiation

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/17/showbiz/celebrity-news-gossip/lwren-scott-designer-obit/
re : L'Wren Scott suicide

"L'Wren Scott, a noted fashion designer who has been Mick Jagger's companion for more than a decade, was found dead in her New York apartment Monday of an apparent suicide, according to a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Scott's assistant found the designer hanging from a door knob with a scarf around her neck, the official said."

(She was 6'3")

 

[bettybaby00]

:heartbeat: Thank you for all the kind words, Sandstorm. One of these days I should put it all together and post my theory in the Members' Theories thread (either that or write a book ), but I haven't done it yet.

A simple answer to the part of my post you questioned is that I think the cord was tied loosely around JonBenet's neck and secured to some other object (maybe a doorknob?) while the molestation was happening. I think the head blow was deliberate, but not premeditated. I think it caused her to collapse because of unconsciousness, thereby pulling on the cord which tightened around her neck strangling her.

If you care to read a little more detail, I probably wrote more in the following post than I have anywhere else:

Explain BDI to me - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


If you have any questions that aren't answered there, just ask, or drop me a PM.

Unbelievable how much your theory makes sense. I had read it of course, probably when you first posted it, but it was well worth a 2nd read. I actually just had 2 aha thoughts.

1st, I was definitely one of those people who felt there was no evidence/indication that any sort of suspension was involved. After reading your theory, coupled with just learning about "passive hanging" from L'Wren Scott's suicide and it's now clear to me that this could be s an explanation for the strangulation.

The 2nd aha stems from a couple of Kolar's remarks. I certainly noticed them but by going back at this time, I realized I might not have given them the attention they deserved. When he discusses BRs possible involvement, I didn't fully appreciate the language he used, and that he potentially believes that BR did it all--sexual assault, head bash & strangulation. I have always felt that if involved, BR was likely responsible for the assault and the head bash. In hindsight, Kolar's words and your post have made me view those comments differently. As a result of his investigation he stated...

These studies confirmed that children of his age were capable of committing horrendous acts of physical violence typically thought to have been reserved to adults.

Whether it had been accidental, or intentional, I believed that the national statistics pointed to the real possibility that a 9 or 10-year old could have committed a crime as egregious as the murder of JonBenét. It was my belief that the possibility of Burke’s involvement in the events of December 25 – 26 warranted further exploration.

Emphasis mine

IDK, I probably sound silly, but his use of such strong language suddenly clicked with me. In addition, the idea of passive hanging possibly playing a role in JRBs death made all the pieces fall into place for me. Especially as it pertains to JB & PR. This scenario offers a much more plausible "reason" why they didn't call 911. If this is the type of scene they came upon, it's not difficult to understand why they would be so willing to hide what happened. And it most certainly offers a reason why they likely didn't call anyone in an attempt to find out whether or not BR could be held criminally responsible.

I know others have probably tried to convey a similar message/theory, but for whatever reason, today, rereading OTG's post made the light bulb explode in my head :blushing:

 

[otg]

Heyya otg,

OT, but I can't help but note
deaths by asphyxiation

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/17/showbiz/celebrity-news-gossip/lwren-scott-designer-obit/
re : L'Wren Scott suicide

"L'Wren Scott, a noted fashion designer who has been Mick Jagger's companion for more than a decade, was found dead in her New York apartment Monday of an apparent suicide, according to a law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Scott's assistant found the designer hanging from a door knob with a scarf around her neck, the official said."

(She was 6'3")

I heard the sad news about Ms. Scott's death, and that she had apparently died by her own choice. I didn't know how she chose to do it (but it's not surprising).

There was another discussion between me and gramcracker on "The Ligatures" thread about this method showing up on TV shows and in movies. If a person is of the mind to be looking for a simple, painless way to die, this would be the one chosen by many. I have run across several sites where this is discussed between people who are considering "ending it all" -- very dark, depressing places. But some of them go into great detail explaining exactly how to do it, what to use, what to attach it to, how long it takes, what your loved ones will find when the dead body is found (much less traumatic to them than say a gunshot to the head). I think, if it ever came to that point in my life, I would consider this method. If done correctly, there is no restriction of breathing -- no gasping for air. And after 10 to 15 seconds, the person simply passes out from lack of oxygenated blood to the brain. Unconscious, life systems eventually shut down, and the person has completed the process of dying within 4 to 5 minutes, all while the person "slept" through it all.

 

[otg]

Bettybaby, the other thing people seem to have a difficult time accepting is the amount of force required to cause the skull fractures. Someone (don't remember now who) said something to the effect that it was enough force to "bring down a 300 lb. linebacker". Okay, I don't think that's something that was tested for accuracy, but it doesn't mean that it wouldn't also have brought down a 45 lb. little girl. But I would still question the amount of force that is presupposed by most, because the thickness of a 6 year old child's skull is much smaller than an adult's. At that age, the diploic layer of the skull has only just begun to develop. The bone structure itself has not completely ossified, and in children much younger than 6, a head blow will sometimes depress without comminution in what is called a "ping pong fracture". This type of injury is treated by cutting a hole in the skull and inserting an instrument that raises the somewhat pliable skull back into place. There are videos on Youtube showing this operation.

Bottom line is that there was not as much strength required as most people assume the assailant had to have in order to cause the fractures that were found in JonBenet's skull.

 

[Tadpole12]

Unbelievable how much your theory makes sense. I had read it of course, probably when you first posted it, but it was well worth a 2nd read. I actually just had 2 aha thoughts.

1st, I was definitely one of those people who felt there was no evidence/indication that any sort of suspension was involved. After reading your theory, coupled with just learning about "passive hanging" from L'Wren Scott's suicide and it's now clear to me that this could be s an explanation for the strangulation.

The 2nd aha stems from a couple of Kolar's remarks. I certainly noticed them but by going back at this time, I realized I might not have given them the attention they deserved. When he discusses BRs possible involvement, I didn't fully appreciate the language he used, and that he potentially believes that BR did it all--sexual assault, head bash & strangulation. I have always felt that if involved, BR was likely responsible for the assault and the head bash. In hindsight, Kolar's words and your post have made me view those comments differently. As a result of his investigation he stated...



Emphasis mine

IDK, I probably sound silly, but his use of such strong language suddenly clicked with me. In addition, the idea of passive hanging possibly playing a role in JRBs death made all the pieces fall into place for me. Especially as it pertains to JB & PR. This scenario offers a much more plausible "reason" why they didn't call 911. If this is the type of scene they came upon, it's not difficult to understand why they would be so willing to hide what happened. And it most certainly offers a reason why they likely didn't call anyone in an attempt to find out whether or not BR could be held criminally responsible.

I know others have probably tried to convey a similar message/theory, but for whatever reason, today, rereading OTG's post made the light bulb explode in my head :blushing:

Heyya bettybaby00,

I know others have probably tried to convey a similar message/theory, but for whatever reason, today, rereading OTG's post made the light bulb explode in my head :blushing:

Right on.*

*it's interesting to reread the JBR material post Kolar's publication, and
reconsider.

If this is the type of scene they came upon, it's not difficult to understand why they would be so willing to hide what happened.

What a mind blowing, horrific discovery that would be.

 

[bettybaby00]

Bettybaby, the other thing people seem to have a difficult time accepting is the amount of force required to cause the skull fractures. Someone (don't remember now who) said something to the effect that it was enough force to "bring down a 300 lb. linebacker". Okay, I don't think that's something that was tested for accuracy, but it doesn't mean that it wouldn't also have brought down a 45 lb. little girl. But I would still question the amount of force that is presupposed by most, because the thickness of a 6 year old child's skull is much smaller than an adult's. At that age, the diploic layer of the skull has only just begun to develop. The bone structure itself has not completely ossified, and in children much younger than 6, a head blow will sometimes depress without comminution in what is called a "ping pong fracture". This type of injury is treated by cutting a hole in the skull and inserting an instrument that raises the somewhat pliable skull back into place. There are videos on Youtube showing this operation.

Bottom line is that there was not as much strength required as most people assume the assailant had to have in order to cause the fractures that were found in JonBenet's skull.

Someone posted somewhere on here about Prince William sustaining an injury as you've you described, and how after the "operation," he was as good as new.

As for BR having the strength, I never really doubted that, and IA with what you are saying re: gorilla vs. little girl, as well as what stage of development her skull would have been at at the time of her death.

I think it was on that Nancy Grace special that I first heard BR characterized as frail. And I heard it repeated numerous times after Kolar's book. My first thought was, "frail, FRAIL?" why would anyone described him in that manner? coughLINWOODcough. Moreover, my son is 12, and kinda a bean pole, thin and lanky, much like BR. I would never in a million years describe my son as frail. Kolar makes note of how much BIGGER BR is compared to JRB, which is what is most significant. He was also athletic, and I mean c'mon, his involvement in baseball certainly illustrates he knows how to take a swing with force behind it.

I guess what hit me so strongly today, was the possibility that he just might have been responsible for it all. I never really thought that was the likely scenario. the light bulb also has me reevaluating their parents in a very different way.

 

[Venom]

My first thought was, "frail, FRAIL?" why would anyone described him in that manner? coughLINWOODcough.

IMO, someone describing BR as "frail" is just trying to deflect attention away from BR.

 

[Charterhouse]

I just read yesterday, I can't remember where, probably at ACR. BR just had a growth spurt and the pictures the R's released of BR were before that growth spurt. They were covering everything all the way down to the smallest detail. IMO

 

[Anti-K]

In the webcast you referenced, I don't think Kolar ever understood the significance of whether or not the coroner had to cut any of the hair that was entwined with the cord wraps on the paintbrush (despite Cynic's valiant attempt to get it out of him). He even said during the questions that he had seen so many photos he wasn't really sure about the details. One of the photos taken of JonBenet's body on the floor appears to show at least two strands of hair pulled tight between the "handle" and her head. I'm still not convinced from what Kolar said that this wasn't the case, but we can disagree on that. Unfortunately, Meyer was not very specific about this in his AR either.

I agree that the urine may not have washed away the blood (although that is still a possible contributing factor). But the conclusion that this means the penetration occurred after the bladder release is incorrect. If anything, this assumption would indicate the opposite. The AR indicates that the penetration occurred while she was alive. The urine release would happen postmortem.

Also, if you listen to the question just after the discussion you referenced in your post, Kolar confirms (if you choose to rely on his recollection) the urine stain on the carpet in the basement, which in some other post you had said was never tested and confirmed. This urine stain was first brought up years ago by Jameson before the public was aware of it. There was speculation at one time (not that it matters now) to deflect its significance that it might have even been a spot made by Jacques because of his habit of peeing on the floor. It has since been confirmed by other inside sources that it was human urine. I don't know if it was tested for DNA. But don't bother asking me for links -- I don't have the time to research it. If anyone chooses to ignore this as legitimate evidence, it's their choice.

Cynic clearly asked if the hair had been cut by the coroner.

Kolar doesn’t need to understand the significance of the question. He only needs to know if the hair was cut by the coroner or if it was pulled out by the killer.

Kolar tells Cynic, “...there was a number of hair that had been pulled, hairs that had been pulled from, um, from her head and neck area if I recall correctly...”

In other words: the hair was not cut by the coroner.

Cynic restates his question and Kolar tells him, “...my impression and my recollection is that the uh the hair that was connected ... was not connected to her scalp or hair or her neck at that juncture...”

In other words: the hair was not cut by the coroner.

In his book, Kolar tells us that the coroner cut the hair that was entwined in the not around the neck. In his book, Thomas tells us that the coroner cut the hair that was entwined in the not around the neck. Neither mentions the coroner cutting the hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle. Why not? Maybe, because it didn’t happen.

(if the coroner cut the hair why wouldn’t he cut it close to the wrapping as he did with the hair entwined in the ligature knot?)

On the urine: I’m not disputing it, and I think it is true, but, as far as I know, the urine stain on the basement floor was never actually tested. Repeat - I’m not disputing it, and I think it is true...

Before or After:
The urine didn’t wash away the blood. I don’t know why you say it “may not have.” It didn’t. And, I don’t know who you’re agreeing with.
You are incorrect when you say that I am incorrect. Ha!

Bladder release (empties) can occur after death, but it can also occur before death. It can occur before and very close to point of death. If it occurs very close to point of death, than it will not occur at point of death – it’s already empty.
...

AK